Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Lassiviren

Merkatz's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 341 posts (430 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 341 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

I definitely have a few problems with 5e. The class escalator type design where there is very little customization at each level is definitely a negative. I also think this bounded accuracy with rare and small modifiers would have worked much better as a 3d6 system instead of a d20. The other mechanic I have issue with is Disadvantage/Advantage. At it's core I think it is great, but it requires some better stacking rules since everything seems to use it. Finally, I'd really like some specific rules on what I can spend all my money on.

On the other hand, I think 5e has a lot of strengths. Spells are handled much better in 5e than in Pathfinder. Concentration is a great mechanic, spell scaling by using higher slots, and memorization is much more useful.

In addition, while there are a lot fewer tidbits to play with and customize in 5e, I think I can realize and effectively play a lot more types of characters in 5e core than I can in Pathfinder core.

-Finesse and/or Mobile Warriors. Holy s#++, I can play a good finesse Fighter, or Rogue, or Paladin, or w/e, right from level 1! Try that in PF Core.
-Sniper Rogues. Rogues with ranged attacks are no longer a dream. Hell, playing a Rogue in general is no longer a dream!
-Gishes of all shapes and sizes. Valor Bards, EK Fighters, Trickster Rogues, Way of the Shadow or Elemental Monks all make for far more effective gishes then their counterparts in core only PF.
-Monks don't suck. And the three different flavors of Monk are definitely unique.
-Healers without magic. The Healer feat means you don't have to play a magic class to actually be able to heal wounds effectively!
-Fighters can do cool Fighty things. Battle Master Fighters can actually learn about and gather information about opponents they are fighting and do awesome things like make Ranged Disarms and the like.

Excaliburproxy wrote:
Quote:
What's a mechanical expression you can do in the PF CRB that you can't do with the 5e PHB?

A near-optimal trip (or other combat maneuver) build with martial classes besides the fighter.

A real deal Batman wizard that don't give two damns about fighting.

A bard that actually can improve the combat viability of the party every turn consistently and then picks up feat chains to help his buddies out (feinting and the like).

Barbarians that do cool stuff other than move, hit things with swords, and take damage (admittedly pretty good stuff though).

Animal companion builds where the animal companion does stuff other than attack in combat.

Okay, I personally feel like you can do ALL of these in 5e. Let's take it from the top.

-Non-Fighter trip build. Anyone can use their Attack action to Shove (PF's Bull Rush/Trip) without having to invest anything! And martial characters don't even have to give up their full action to do it (as it only replaces 1 of their attacks). So a 5th level Barbarian can trip an opponent and attack it all in one turn! And actually, Strength based Valor Bards are really effective trippers (in terms of success rate) so long as they take their Expertise in the Athletics skill.

-Batman Wizard that doesn't give a damn about fighting. Uhh don't take fighting spells then, and instead focus on utility? Hell, the spell Enhance Ability is one spell that can give you advantage on any ability check you desire! Talk about out of combat utility. I'm not really seeing where the PF Wizard somehow does this noticeably better. Although I will stress that I believe the Bard is the real Batman of 5e.

-Bards that buff. Magical Secrets is your answer. Bards can cherry pick any spell they want in the game. Want to be a buffer? Take buff spells (like bless). At first level you have options like Faerie Fire to give allies advantage against targets, Heroism for a defensive buff, and using Inspiration in key moments.

-Barbarians that do cool stuff. Totem Warriors can commune with animals and see through their eyes, and choose different animal aspects to help you out in combat. They can also do maneuvers without the need of a Feat investment. Now I agree, I think Barbarians could use some more love, but I don't think core PF Barbarians were all that either. It really took Totems and archetypes to make PF Barbarians really shine.

-Animal Companions that do stuff other than attack. Attack actions can be used to do things like trip, shove, and grapple. They can also take the Help action which can be fluffed to be all kinds of flavorful options.


Justin Sane wrote:

Also, Sage Sorcerers get +2 Spellcraft and Knowledge: Arcana.

So, 22 Int, 6 ranks, Theoretical Magician trait, Skill Focus, Magical Aptitude, Armillary Amulet, Bloodline Arcana = 6 + 6 ( + 3 ) + 2 + 3 + 2 + 5 + 2 = +29.

If we want to get the biggest boost from classes, it looks like going Sage Sorcerer 1, Magician Bard 4, Pathfinder Savant 1 will grant +2, +2, +1 to Spellcraft, respectively. That will change the total to a +32.

And of course Aid Another bonuses could get ridiculously high fast, especially with Helpful Halflings and the like.


Well first things first, everyone agrees mixed defenses are more important than maxing one ability at the cost of all else. But you probably already know that.

As a general rule of thumb, I usually consider level + 15 to be a decent AC, level + 20+ to be a strong AC, and to not even bother with anything below level + 10 AC.

As far as mythic goes, well that really, really depends on the Tier/Level ratio- but I will say, I think Mythic offers a lot more options for layered defense instead of pure AC. Mythic has plenty of ways to force rerolls, absorb damage, ignore critical, and other abilities.


Well the spell Fireball ruined a lot of the theme and flavor in my Skull and Shackles campaign. And that's almost as basic and as iconic as a spell can get.

Catching merchant ships is a very lucrative process (easily 5k gold per ship + cargo for even basic ships). However, all the basic ships statted up in S&S were crewed by low level flunkies (with maybe a medium level officer or two), and almost all ships as written had no defense against long range AoE magic. Lead off the attack with a Fireball or two, and poof, half the enemy crew is dead/dieing, and the ship is now unpilotable. The Sorcerer metamagiced the Fireball do do Cold damage so that the ships wouldn't catch fire and burn away the profit as well.

This was really annoying when the first module taught the players how to do some ship to ship combat and do a boarding action, but once module 2 came about, it was almost pointless. Seriously, comparing a siege engine doing 3d8 damage to a single crew member (or a 1500hp ship) vs Fireballing the entire crew of 2nd level flunkies was a no brainer.

As a result, I pretty much stopped all the piracy encounters, and just gave them a monthly stipend saying, "Yes, you caught X amount of ships, here is your monthly gold."

And sure I modified some encounters and added some rules to make things not completely ridiculous. But I buy APs so I don't have to do so much work, and not once in any of the books is it addresses countermeasures to PCs just chasing down dozens of ships and Fireballing them into helplessness for stupid amounts of funds.


Fantastic. Keep up the great work.


DM Beckett wrote:
Merkatz wrote:


First of all, I hate the layout of this book. Why are the options grouped by type instead of by god? All the deity specific feats, traits, magic items, and spells should have followed after the god's entry. Sure there is a reference chart, but flipping back and forth through 70 pages is annoying as hell- especially if you are using the pdf.
That was actually one of the things I felt the book had going for it. I really hate when Paizo scatters options all over the place, so putting all the Feats into one section, all the spells into one section, etc. . . was great. It means you do not have to search around for something too much, especially if it is not tied (yah, I hated that too) to one specific deity.

I agree that a lot of paizo's products in the past have been annoying with options spread out all over the place, but rarely is the content so heavily restricted to a common theme (ie a specific deity requirement). But 90% of the options have that specific deity requirement. If I have a character in a campaign, and am looking for interesting options, this is just 1 of a dozen books I may need to look through. Having all of my deity specific options located back to back would be so much easier to deal with. Even if I was just glancing through the books for character ideas, it would be nice to be able to see at a glance how this Iomadean Feat works with that Iomadean Trait. Or how religion X offers lots of Wizard/Sorcerer spells, but no Inquisitor ones.

And so on and so forth.

Ross Byers wrote:
I think it's deliberate: it means that someone who is normally only interested in, say, Iomedae will see an interesting option for Shelyn or Calistra, and broaden their horizons, instead of pigeonholing into one section of the book.

That's great for a first read through- but not for ease of use when going from level 2 to 20 with a character I already have.


I was pretty excited about this book, but after looking over a friends copy, I must say I am greatly disappointed. I'm not a huge fan of most of the main gods, but love many of the minor ones. And instead of being about 300+ gods, this book really only focused on the main 20. But that is only a minor point in comparison to my other issues.

First of all, I hate the layout of this book. Why are the options grouped by type instead of by god? All the deity specific feats, traits, magic items, and spells should have followed after the god's entry. Sure there is a reference chart, but flipping back and forth through 70 pages is annoying as hell- especially if you are using the pdf.

Second, out of all of the compiled and rehashed information gathered in this book, the specialized summoning list is strangely absent. Why? It's such a flavorful option that wasn't easily accessible. And thanks to this missed opportunity, it still isn't.

Thirdly, while I've seen some interesting mechanics- everything is locked behind strict flavor requirements (ie specific deity worship). And while this isn't bad in and of itself, the book looses a lot of value for me personally if the good mechanical options are tied to flavor (ie deities) that I don't like, while the flavor I like has an over abundance of suboptimal options. For instance, there are literally no options that I find appealing for my Varisian Sorcerer who worships Desna that is currently in a S* campaign. Or finding out that Sentinel Boons for Cayden Cailen are almost entirely redundant with the Sentinel class itself,

So for the above reasons, I won't be purchasing a personal copy of this book.


Seannoss wrote:

Its not really 36k for an item, as like crafting you get 50%. At the end of book two I think my PCs had 25-30k each to spend on items. At the end of book 3 it was 40-45k.

It seems pretty broken to me(mostly again because you know what you're fighting in this AP)...but I also don't like mythic rules, so I will admit to my views being tainted.

36k is the 50% craft price of that +6 weapon you said a 9th level character can get. It seems to me that you think this is broken because no one in your game crafted at 4x speed as a Mythic Crafter. In the face of that, Legendary Weapon being upgradeable is only a useful boon in most campaigns and only strong in campaigns without a crafter or with absolutely zero downtime- but still hardly broken.


Definitely would be interested in trying this out. I've actually been working on a Savage Worlds game inspired by the likes of SAO, .hack, and LH as well. But it would nice to play in a game instead of just running one.


We ruled that the "Upgradeable" special ability lets you upgrade the item in every way that you would be allowed to upgrade the item via normal crafting rules. The only thing we didn't permit was the adding of additional enhancements for 150% cost (eg adding feather step enhancement to boots of striding and springing)- but that didn't ever come up in the first place.

Now, adding of non-enhancement equivalent bonuses (such as adding the Adaptive bonus to a bow) may not be explicitly spelled out, but I personally think it is covered as still being a "greater version."

Sure, this may lead a person to making a really tricked out weapon or armor with a bunch of bonuses- but isn't that the point? A Legendary Weapon in a Mythic game should be pretty ridiculous. And I still maintain that a Mythic Crafter could be making ridiculous items like that anyways. So it seems legit to me.


Seannoss wrote:

Many people think that crafting is too easy. There is so much treasure in this campaign that the gold isn't the limiting resource, time is. So I consider having a axiomatic, holy, evil outsider bane weapon at level 9 to be more than I would like to see.

And it gets two, possibly better, abilities on top of that. Cool stuff.

In our play through money was fairly tight before book 4. None of our 9th level characters could really afford 36k for a single item. On the other hand, crafting time was of very little concern, especially in book 3.

A Mythic Crafter crafts 4k worth per day. He even crafts 1k per day while exploring. With the rebuilding of Drezen and the hexploration that dominates a large portion of book 3, we had plenty of time to craft. Hell to make that effective +6 weapon (+1 axiomatic, holy, evil outsider bane) it would only take 18 days total. And that's if it was done from scratch. Most likely it was already a +2 or +3 weapon from being upgraded. So it would only take a 2 weeks out of the months of downtime.

I think upgradeable is a nice power, but in the face of things like Mythic Crafting and the other Mythic abilities, I don't think it is anywhere near broken.


137ben wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

I'm not sure if the 15ft range or the number of monsters immune to it is the nastier part.

It's strong, but doesn't do everything.

I think the number of things immune to it is the bigger issue.

You're an oracle, not a wizard. The 15ft range does mean, though, that it isn't going to be hitting very many monsters at once.
Either way, compared to what a time oracle gets? This is pretty minor.

The problem stems exactly from the fact that he is an oracle, not a wizard, though. A spontaneous caster casts this metamagic'd color spray as a full round action. That means he can only 5 foot step to get into position to cast this spell with 15 foot range. Pray there are no allies in the way.


I think the funniest thing about these totalitarian cities is that in the given examples they stop at just dealing with magic. If they are going to spend so much money and manpower, why don't they just take the extra step to negate mundane threats as well. Why no physical pat downs that foil your mundane disguise? Why not Zones of Truth or Detect Thoughts to see through your mundane bluff?


Majuba wrote:
Merkatz wrote:
Be a cleric of a general concept instead of a specific deity. Now you can take other domains (in this case a druid domain), Take the Plains domain and you can now cast haste with your domain spell slots.

Terrain domains are only available to nature-themed classes.

PRD wrote:
"Other nature-themed classes with access to domains may select an animal or terrain domain in place of a regular domain.

Obviously you play a Cleric of Nature then. Done.


Be a cleric of a general concept instead of a specific deity. Now you can take other domains (in this case a druid domain), Take the Plains domain and you can now cast haste with your domain spell slots.


That begs the question PatientWolf, if I am a regular human who takes Aspect of the Beast to grow claws, would you require a disguise check to still appear human? What if I am a sorcerer and my bloodline grants me wings? Or if I grow horns while raging?

I still think taking racial heritage on a scion of humanity aasimar is pretty cheesy (but then again I think aasimars can be pretty cheesy in general).


3 levels of Cave Druid will get you Lightfoot which will permanently keep you off the tremorsense radar.

Not terribly optimal for you though...

Edit: Boots of the Soft Step (Legacy of Fire magic item) blocks tremorsense if you move slowly enough. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/a-b/boots -of-the-soft-step


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Steve Geddes: I like magic being stronger than mundane as well, but if that is going to be the case, there needs to be certain restraints in place. And of course, Pathfinder has none of those.

With overpowering magic, some of the following should apply:
-Magic should be rare (in PF magic is everywhere, even high level magic. 13 of 19 base classes are magic users).

-Magic should be dangerous to use (in PF there is no punishment for failing a spell or using lots of spells as once)

-Magic, especially higher level magic, should take some setup time (in PF 95% of spells take a few seconds to cast)

-Magic should require specialization or progression (in PF you can cherry pick spells as you desire. Even "specialists" wizards can cherry pick from 80% of the arcane list)

-Magic should be difficult to learn (in PF spell casters gain levels just as easily as martials, and the only time they are weak are like level 1 and 2- but everyone is rather fragile at those levels)

So yeah, I have no problems with individual magical spells outclassing mundane methods but, its stupid how easy it is to become a spellcaster and for them to diversify their abilities and use them without a care.


Neurophage really hit the nail on the head here when talking about feat chains, and the relative lack of non scaling feats.

I mean its really annoying when I invest 3 feats into a chain just to be good at 1 combat maneuver, whilst the wizard can cherry pick 1 spell to be good at 4.

And while it is stupid that martials have to suffer through feat chains, while spell casters can select spells at their leisure, the biggest slap in the face is that casters don't even have to deal with feat chains or obnoxious requirements for their feats. For instance, similar design would require spellcasters to take Spell Focus for every school they would want to use metamagic feats on- or something of that nature.

The other big thing that would help martials out would be a reworking of skills to make them more useful in a wider variety of situations without the need of feats/abilities to modify them. For example, I'd let anyone inspire their allies with the Oratory skill (skill check to see how well you inspire them). Why is that only members of the bard class can give stirring speeches that actually do something? Of course you'd change bards to give them better bonuses to Oratory, such as longer duration, smaller action to activate, etc...

I'd also look at modifying skills to make things like traps and poison actually useful to PCs, increase the power of profession skills so they do something other then generate money, and give more inherent combat options for skills like acrobatics, slight of hand, intimidate, and sense motive without the need for special feats or abilities.


Cuatroespada hit the nail on the head.

The whole idea of having a racial prerequisites is because of physical differences amongst the races. That being the case, there should be an implicit understanding that taking Racial Heritage grants you any needed characteristic that a racial feat would require, provided that characteristic grants no initial mechanical benefit. So obviously things like darkvision and skill bonuses aren't granted, but things like tails and scales are fine.

The only difference between Tail Terror and a different racial feat is that Tail Terror specifically calls out what distinguishes a normal human from a normal kobold. That shouldn't prevent you from using Tail Terror via Racial Heritage.

If you argue that this isn't the case then Racial Heritage logically falls apart for pretty much every other use as well.

cuatroespada pointed out Razor Tusk and Agile Tongue as two very striking examples, but I think that this is the case for pretty much every racial feat. Even innocuous examples like Feline Grace (grants a few CMD bonuses) restricts usage to a catfolk body only.That prereq is essentially saying that the balance required for Feline Grace is only available to feline characters who have appropriate muscle/mass ratios, and appendages such as tails and whiskers. But no one here will say Racial Heritage doesn't let you use Feline Grace.

Any argument against the usage of Tail Terror via Racial Heritage is pretty much saying "Racial Heritage can morph and modify your body type fluff any way fitting for that race, except if such a feature is specifically identified in a racial feat or ability." And that doesn't make any sense.


Swashbucklersdc wrote:
I would advise against any character that has an anial companion to dump Charisma; one of your most important skills is Handle Animal. With only 1 rank in it at level 1, your handle Animal is only going to be a +2. You are going to have trouble getting your animal to do even tricks you have taught it.

Meh... Animal Companions all have "Link" which gives a +4 to that Handle Animal check. So even with that dumped Charisma, you still successfully "Handle" 85% of the time at first level, which will obviously get higher with level. I don't think it's a problem.


Tristan, I am comparing the proposal to the podcast change.

You say "extra reward," but that's an illusion. If I have to pay for a res, I am still out that cost. Delayed Credit just means I lose that money at 7th lvl instead of 4th... All because I took extra risk for the team, and I got no advantage for my troubles.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Robert Matthews 166 wrote:
Merkatz wrote:

I'm still seeing 0 incentive in wanting to play up, even with the Delayed Credit option in play. I'm still taking an increased risk and I'm stil probably spending more money to play up, but still get no extra gold to compensate. Delayed Credit does nothing to change that (it just means pushing off losses to another date.

Your two playing up "options" just look like this to me: Play up and risk your PC to take a wealth hit (A) now or (B) later.

That is the point. There isn't supposed to be an incentive to play up. That is the goal of this entire discussion.

Then the only way I would play up is if I am "bullied" into doing so. And we a wanted to avoid that, remember?


I'm still seeing 0 incentive in wanting to play up, even with the Delayed Credit option in play. I'm still taking an increased risk and I'm still probably spending more money to play up, but still get no extra gold to compensate. Delayed Credit does nothing to change that (it just means pushing off losses to another date).

Your two playing up "options" just look like this to me: Play up and risk your PC to take a wealth hit (A) now or (B) later.


I don't understand the support for the "Delayed Reward" proposal. It seems like the illusion of a solution rather than actually solving anything. I mean what concerns that people had with the podcast change does it actually address?

-If I play down a few games will this let we recoup my losses later? No.
-If I would incur extra losses for playing up would I get anything extra to take care of that? No.

And heck, don't most people like building up characters and playing characters at higher levels? I know for a fact that I don't want to play extra scenarios at lower level and limit the number of times I can actually play my character at a lower level.

Not to mention, unless this "Delayed Reward" proposal 100% covers all GP and consumable expenditures made in the scenario I am going find myself in a worse off situation next week than I was this week (less gold and eq but same xp and pa...)

I'm just really not seeing what this does...


Hey! I'd definitely be up for an AP. We'd need to decide on which exact AP we would be playing before chargen though...

I'm up for most APs (especially the later ones), but I think Reign of Winter will have the most support since it is the new hotness. And if we go for Reign of Winter, I think I'd like to try out a Huntmaster Cavalier (multiple dog companions + winter environment = dogsled).

So how exactly do you plan on deciding which AP you are going to run?


There's always the option of going Beast Rider Cavalier. At 7th level they get the option to apply a unique Large template to any creature that is normally large, but isn't usually as an animal companion.

Of course, I still think Paizo dropped the ball by not putting out a large bear by default...


I have to agree with Turin. Aasimars were good option pre ARG, but now they just look completely delicious to me... True, they only work well in certain classes- but they can do some pretty ridiculous things that no others can do. If I am playing a class that needs either Charisma or Wisdom, it's hard to do better than Aasimar.

Enough people have already talked about the basic perks... But, I haven't seen anyone talk about Favored Class Bonuses at all. Adding 1/2 level to a single Bard performance or Oracle Revelation is absolutely amazing.

The primary benefit to Aasimar Bards is that they can exit the Bard class early while still having full progression in their main performance (leave vanilla Bard at 13 and still have swift action +4 Inspire Courage for example).

With Oracle, it's all about boosting up that one revelation that doesn't have any caps. Oracle of Life with 17d6 channel? Oracle of Battle that has a BAB of +30 for 1 type of CM. Get an additional +4 AC Armor options available to most Oracles (eg Ancestor's Spirit Shield caps at +16 AC for Aasimars).

Or in campaigns you know won't be going to 20, you can even go after those capped Revelations without worry. Oracle of Nature has a 20th level Animal Companion at 14th level. Blow a single feat for the Aasimar only Celestial Servant, and it now has the Celestial Template complete with Resist Acid, Cold, and Electricity 15, DR 10/evil, and once a day Smite for +16 damage. (Hell, Celestial Servant alone is why Aasimars make good Druids).

And Aasimar's just have cool stuff in general. They get a 3rd level SLA that is exceptionally useful (especially against stupid society modules) that can be easily augmented with a single feat (Heavenly Radiance). Who else can take a single feat to get high level SLAs?

--------------

As a side note, Lumiere do you really consider Resist Energy 5 to Acid, Cold, and Electricity to be useless by third level? Hell, I'd still be happy to take 5 less points of damage from a lightning bolt even at 10th level and beyond...


It's been like this for a while now, but the biggest problem I still have with the program is that a lot (most?) if the NPC's have quite a bit of gear missing from their blocks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For all of the class archetypes in the UM book (including the entire Magus class as well), there are 21 points of FAQ/errata. 10 of those FAQ/errata are for the Synthesist.

I don't want to print out 2 tricking pages of rules clarifications just for one archetype...


Yeah, he keeps all those proficiencies as per RAW.

So hilariously enough, I cannot think of a single class or archetype that is proficient with more weapons then the Unarmed Fighter is. I think that was the real thing that Ravingdork was getting caught up on.


Hey! Welcome to town! I'm another Beavercreek local.

Honestly, the best way to meet gaming groups is to just go to the stores and see what you can find! But off the top of my head, here's what I know is going down around town:

Bookery Fantasy (Fairborn):
-Boardgaming every Sunday afternoon
-Sunday afternoon Skull and Shackles campaign that I think is looking for players

Epic Loot (Centerville)
-Boardgaming every Thursday and Saturday night
-Lots of RPGs popping up (I just joined a Burning Wheel group of youngsters last Friday, and saw a Shadowrun group get kicked off as well with a 4E group already running strong).

Bell, Book, and Comic (Dayton):
-Boardgaming every Friday night, and every other Tuesday night
-Pathfinder Society every other Wednesday night

Epic Loot is the newest store and has by far the best turn out for anything (they also have a huge wall of free to play games). Bookery Fantasy always has a solid Sunday crowd. Bell, Book, and Comic has somewhat become hit and miss. It looks like it's being more dominated by the MtG crowd over everything else.

Also check out the SOGG group (rpgers) and the Game-Day group (board gamers). Both of which are very active, and can give you more definite confirmations of dates and activities.

Best of luck, and hope to see you around.


Why are we delving into the idea of granting players another swift action? They just need to make some of the powers a 1/round free action or just as a part of another action.

Now there would still be the worry of using a bunch of different abilities in one turn, but they can just do like they did for the SA Rogue Talents. Put an asterisks next to the troublesome ones and just say you can't use more than one of those per round as a general rule. That sort of falls in line with what we have already without the need to add extra action types.


shallowsoul wrote:


A monk gets to ignore prerequisites for a lot of feats but does that automatically make them a better class? Also, why is it such a deal breaker to get a feat five levels early? Unless it's the feat "I win", then it doesn't suddenly make one class better than another.

Actually, Monk is a fine example of a class that isn't good just because it gets a bunch of extra feats. However, in the right combination all those extra feats without prereqs can be quite ridiculous (see Zen Archer).

But why is getting something 5 levels earlier such a big deal to me? Because in my games that means I get to play with it about 6 months earlier. And if it is a good or fun feat that's a pretty big deal.

The thing is, I really, really want to like the Fighter. I love open chassis character types. And in all actuality, most of us don't have too big of a problem with the Fighter as is. Yeah more skill points and better saves would be nice. But what we really have a problem with is feats in general.

If they ease back on prereqs, scale feats better, breakup / improve certain chains, remove certain feats that should be always available to anyone, and give us some more feats with new and interesting options (not just +X to Y), then I could love playing the Fighter.

That's not too much to ask for, is it? XD


bugleyman wrote:
The most jarring thing I've noticed so far is a con artist that doesn't have bluff.

It's a bard with Versatile Performance (Act). He doesn't need to put ranks into the bluff skill.

Although I reall wish they would state this more clearly in stat blocks. Performance skill equivaencies are not something I'll ever memorize...


9 people marked this as a favorite.

From most important to least:


  • Person who brings snacks.
  • Person who accurately keeps track of loot
  • Person who can talk for party regardless of CHA score
  • Person who can tell you what option is best for you and what book it is in
  • Person who can keep track of the DM's plot and those silly subsystems


Okay, after my first time through, the thing that stands out the most is that aside from the PrC examples there is not a single multiclassed character in the book... That was pretty disappointing to me.

Now I know space is limited, but instead of spending 25 pages on the iconics (which are already available for free), you could have let the developers get creative with that space and make some NPCs without any class restrictions.


Yeah, I really don't like feats being the main feature of a class. Too many feats are just boring static bonuses or are meant to modify actual class abilities (of which the fighter has none). And most of the interesting feats are stuck behind annoying prereqs (eg most manuever feats) or obnoxious chains (eg Whirlwind Attack). It doesn't help the fact that there is a strong need to reinvest in feats to stay relevant (eg vital strike), or have feats with higher and higher prereqs but with diminishing returns (eg TWF). And this compounded by the fact that a fighter is almost forced to select certain feats once he gets into higher levels (eg Iron Will).

Now add that to the fact that there are many, many ways for other classes to use feats more efficiently than fighters (through early access, ignoring prereqs, or having modified abilities) on top of there other abilities.

Lemmy had a good example: A Battle Oracle who takes Extra Revelation: Weapon Mastery gets three feats for the price of one...

Rangers are another one... Archery Rangers can get Imp Precise Strike 5 levels early. Mounted Rangers can get the fearsome Mounted Skirmisher feat 4 levels early and without needing Trick Riding first. Two handed weapon Rangers can pick up Great Cleave without needing regular Cleave first.

I ask myself "Why would I ever play a fighter?" And I find that I have no answer.


Actually, I really like the idea of just throwing out some more regular/mythic feats that requires a decent Str prerequisite. I can't think of a single PC feat that requires more than Str 13- whereas I can think of at least a dozen Dex feats... That's part of the problem.

A good start would be making mythic power attack require Str 17 or something. Or how about a mythic feat that lets you wield oversize weapons without penalty (ie human wielding large greatsword)?

But then, lets not make everything be about damage for Str... The ability to apply certain conditions or do combat maneuvers as a part of a regular attack (ie still doing the damage) could be one possibility.

And the point still remains that Dex builds are using resources to catch up to Str builds and Str builds can close the gap on the normal Dex advantages with a lot of mythic options (many of which are free).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artanthos wrote:

You mean they gave wizards a mythic feat that is still less than paragon surge?

No, not the feat. The base ability for Archmages called Wild Arcana. And it is much better than Paragon Surge. Paragon Surge requires you to use a spell and a round to set it up to get a specific spell for a short duration. And the spells you cast still come out of your available slots. Wild Arcana lets you use Mythic Power at will to cast any spell your class could let you without expending spell slots. Welcome to +15 additional 9th levels spells that the wizard can spontaneously cast at 20th level- just from one level of Mythic.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

But back to Mythic Finesse:
Well the feat is incorrectly and poorly worded at best. But i think so long as it doesn't do 1.5 damage with two handlers its fine.

And let's be fair, while Dex is a god stat in the regular game, there are a lot of little abilities in Mythic that make Dex far less necessary.

Inititiative bonus? Everyone gets a +20 at Myth 2.

Reflex Saves? Its the least important save. You can always burn Mythic Power after the fact if it is critically important. And there are other Myth features that can help make such thing irrelevant (heck everyone gets a version of improved evasion, but it works for all saves, except those from mythic spells at tier 5).

AC? Mythic offers a few ways to get DR, a couple ways to flat out ignore damage, and quite a few ways to get some AC bumps (mythic combat expertise gives you a +3 to +8 Dodge bonus at no penalty for 10 rounds at the cost of 1 Mythic Power for instance).

So what martial characters would choose Str over Dex? Those who don't want to be terrible in early levels before Mythic comes into play and those want to explore more interesting options in Mythic without having a delayed progression because you need a certain feat and some paths abilities to max out Dex properly (after all, tiers are supposed to take longer to obtain than normal levels).


Oh no Dex to damage!!!! Of course it's more powerful than Dervish Dance. This is a Mythic feat, it's supposed to be better.

And as far as Mythic goes, it's still not that powerful in comparison to other things.

A 5th level Wizard with 20 Int who gets 1 Tier of Archmage, selects Wild Arcana and can now choose to spontaneously cast any Wizard spell 3rd level or lower 5 times per day without any preparation.

For those of you keeping track at home, that Wizard can choose from around 500 spells to cast from as needed. And that only get's much worse as the Wizard levels (he doesn't need any more Mythic Tiers). Schrodinger's Wizard is now an actual reality.


Honestly, having flaws doesn't bother me at all. I think some need to be changed a little bit to make everything working, but that's it.

However, what would be lost if we make flaws optional? What is gained by making flaws mandatory?

I can't think of any reason why they shouldn't just be optional.


Yeah, I think School Aversion is by far the worst choice as a Mythic Flaw.

-4 Against all saves AND effects lasting twice as long against you is bad enough. But no benefit from spells (or effects) from that school? That's brutal.

Transmutation isn't used offensively? Enjoy never benefiting from Feather Fall, Expeditious Retreat, Haste, Fly (and similar flight abilities), all the good polymorph effects, Time Stop, and a bunch of other common buffs.

And oh god, could you imagine taking School Aversion: Conjuration? How would you heal???


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Hey Jason, just curious to see what you think would be the best way to handle WBL for Mythic Tiers.

EG If we were playing something written for 15th level characters, would you recommend everyone starting with 15th level average wealth?

Or would the character that is 10/5M start with just average wealth for a 10th level character? Then the character at 13/2M have 13th level wealth and the normal 15th level character be the only one with 15th level wealth.

Or what if it was just everyone at 10/5M. Should they go against challenges build for APL 15 with 10th or 15th level wealth?

Or are you hoping for all different kinds of mixes?


Edit: Big Ninja...

Actually, Mort, I did find a CR requirement. It's on Page 35 in the GM section. I think the reason I missed it before (and probably other people) is because it talks about those CR guidelines for Lesser Trials under a subheading labeled Greater Trials.

It says that you can normally only accomplish a Lesser Trial when up against a creature with an adjusted CR equal to your adjusted level. Or possibly a group with a CR each 1 or 2 lower. However, that doesn't change how easy some of the skill challenges are.

____________________________________

However, I think one of the biggest problems is that there are only 13 presented examples of Lesser Trials available to each path. However, a character progressing all the way to Tier 10 needs to accomplish 55 Lesser Trials. Repeating trials over and over again becomes decisively less and less mythic to me. Yes James, creating a throw away Intelligent Item isn't very Mythic, but unless the DM creates 50 more Lesser Trials available for each path, you are going to be repeating trials. I begin to get less interested in how awesome it is to create an Intelligent Item when it's the sixth one I've had to make.

____________________________________

And Veiled Nail, yes a lot of us will know what something "Mythic" looks like when we see it, but the problem is that you have to declare what your Trial is before you achieve it. You preform some amazing stunt against all the odds to save the day? Congrats. Here's a Mystic Power Point. Now go cast three random spells off scrolls because that's what you said you would do to show off to the world!


Okay, sounds good.

Thanks Jason.


I'm seeing this in a couple of places, but here is one example:

Iron Will (Mythic)
Your will is incorruptible.
Prerequisite: Iron Will, 3rd mythic tier.
Benefit: Whenever you roll a Will saving throw against a spell, spell-like ability, or special ability from a nonmythic source, you may roll twice and take the best result.

Does anything with a Mythic Tier or Mythic Rank count as a mythic source? EG if a Mythic Wizard casts a normal Dominate Person, would Iron Will (Mythic) apply?

Or would this just apply to those specific Mythic Spells or regular spells that have been modified in some way with Mythic Power?

I am curious, because if everything a Mythic character does counts as Mythic, how do some of these feats/abilities work in higher Myth/Level games? If I am playing as a 15 level character with 7 Myth Tiers, how many things am I fighting with absolutely no Myth levels? If the answer to that question is "almost none" then would things like Iron Will (Mythic) become completely useless?


However, the player does have to declare the trial before he attempts it in order for it to count for Mythic progression.

So the point remains. Players still know what trials they have to complete, so that incentive to be selfish over working as a team is still there.


You think Dependency is the easiest flaw?

How about Weapon Weakness (Siege Engine)? When was the last time you were attacked by one of those?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okay, so a little bit of hyperbole, but there seems to be a heck of a lot of abilities using Swift (or Immediate) Actions in this playtest.

That's great for a classes like Fighter who really don't have any use for swift actions, but it seems like Bard and Inquistor who already struggle with their number of swift action abilities are getting the shaft.

I played an Arcane Duelist that already needed swift actions for Performance, Arcane Strike, and quite a few spells (the finale and inspiration line of spells for instance). The obvious path for bard is Marshal, yet every single Marshal's Order requires a swift action, Mythic Power requires a swift action, and a lot of the path abilities require swift actions.

Would it be that terribly overpower to change at least some of these to 1/round free actions?

1 to 50 of 341 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.